“…Of the selected studies used in this study, 91% produced in-house devices [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 ], only 9% of studies used commercial devices [ 43 , 47 ], due to the variability of device design used in the research. Regarding technology used in this fabrication, different lithographic techniques were used, namely, 68.2% soft lithography [ 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 46 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 58 , 59 , 60 ], 13.6% photolithography [ 51 , 56 , 57 ], and 4.5% two-photon lithography [ 41 ], 4.5% used 3D-printing systems [ 44 ], and 9.1% did not report the technology used [ 45 , 47 ]. The main material of the devices was 88% polymers (72% PDMS [ 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 45 , ...…”